Sponsored Links

Volkswagen Golf BlueMotion review

The VW Golf BlueMotion is Volkswagen's most economical family hatch yet

For:

Smooth diesel engine, great six-speed gearbox, handles well

Against:

Hefty premium over standard 1.6 diesel, limited standard equipment.

The Volkswagen Golf BlueMotion takes the low-emissions formula of the original Polo BlueMotion and moves it up a class. The latest model gets an all-new 1.6 TDI diesel and, for the first time, a six-speed manual box instead of the five-speed seen in the MkVI. The BlueMotion comes in three or five-door guises.

Our choice: Golf BlueMotion

Styling

3.8

The Golf's upright styling has evolved over time, and while it’s rather plain next to the rival Mercedes A-Class, there’s no faulting the build quality. Tight shut lines are VW’s forte, and the Golf has a look of precision as a result.

The BlueMotion model gets a few styling tweaks over the standard SE. There’s lowered suspension, while the 15-inch alloys are the smallest wheels available in the family car range. They look a little lost in the arches, but what they lack in size they more than make up for in terms of cruising comfort.

Elsewhere, there are deeper bumpers and side sills, while the grille has a gloss black panel that smooths airflow over the nose. Extra trim on either side of the rear window does the same job. Overall, the Golf’s fuss-free and simple lines suit the no-nonsense nature of the BlueMotion, but we would recommend going for a bright silver or pale blue, because darker colours really do it no favours.

Inside, you get the same high-quality layout that you’ll find in any other Golf. It does have a bit less equipment, but build quality is solid, and subtle touches such as the flock-lined door bins add to the classy feel. The BlueMotion features VW’s touch-sensitive control screen, which works well and is intuitive to navigate around.

Driving

4.8

When Volkswagen came to develop the BlueMotion version of the MkVII Golf, it started with an all-new 1.6 TDI diesel. It’s not the same 1.6 TDI as you’ll find in the standard Golf, and is all the better for this. It’s far less rattly at idle and revs smoothly.

That feeling of smoothness continues when you set off. The 109bhp engine has a low weight to haul around thanks to the Golf’s 1,280kg kerbweight, and as a result it feels quicker than some rival cars. It was also helped by the slick-shifting six-speed gearbox. Not only does this provide accurate shifts, but it also eliminates the feeling of long-legged gearing that was a blight of the last-generation BlueMotions with their five-speed boxes.

At no time does the BlueMotion feel like an eco-special. It rides smoothly, despite its lowered suspension, has lots of overtaking power and in corners it handles just like any other Golf.

That can be put down in part to the standard-fit XDS electronic differential. This limits wheelspin in tight corners, and gives the Golf a grippy front end that the Mercedes can’t come close to matching. The clever kit also makes the BlueMotion genuinely fun to hustle through a series of bends.

The BlueMotion is enjoyable in corners, too. Push on, and the tyres will start to squeal, but grip is reasonable and the chassis is well balanced.

Reliability

4.4

The latest Golf uses VW’s MQB platform, and because this will form the basis of a raft of new models, the manufacturer has invested heavily to make sure it’s reliable and will stand the test of time. The 1.6 TDI diesel is an all-new engine, and the BlueMotion uses special low-friction fluids to improve economy further, but it’s all technology that’s been proven in past BlueMotions, so this shouldn’t affect reliability.

The Golf gets seven airbags, and achieved a five-star rating in its Euro NCAP test.

Practicality

4.2

Choosing the Golf BlueMotion over standard models doesn’t mean you have to compromise on practicality. The Golf BlueMotion has good boot space, while the absence of a spare wheel not only reduces weight (to help improve economy), but also allows for extra storage space under the boot floor.

The cabin is roomy, too, and another advantage is the Golf’s cabin storage. The iPod connection is in a cubby in front of the gearlever, so you can keep your device out of sight, and there’s lots of space for passenger and driver, and a wide range of seat adjustment, while large door storage, a big glovebox and deep bins behind the gearlever and by the driver’s right knee add practicality.

Running Costs

4.8

Claimed emissions of 85g/km are among the best of any hatchback on sale, but they don’t give the Golf any benefit over other sub-100g/km cars in terms of road tax or company car rates.

Claimed economy of 88.3mpg is pretty impressive, and a large fuel tank means you can go further between fills than the Mercedes A180 CDI ECO.

The BlueMotion’s eco roots are exposed when you look at the options list. Fuel-sapping kit such as sat-nav and climate control isn’t available, although you can add larger alloy wheels, which will have a negative effect on fuel economy. Extras like cruise control, park assist, auto lights and heated seats are offered, though. Residuals for both of these cars are a touch under 50 per cent.

Disqus - noscript

Submitted by petegeoff on Tue, 2013-11-12 09:49.

I'd still rather have a Toyota.

Submitted by Miguel on Tue, 2013-11-12 10:37.

Not for me! Dull and overcast.

Submitted by Broken Golf on Tue, 2013-11-12 21:07.

Well we have the mk6 model and it has been anything but reliable or economical, It has a Horrid engine with awful lack of Torque, Really Cant wait to smash it into a Wall. If you must have a Golf Stick to the 2.0 litre or if you live in the sticks, 1.4 TSi petrol model but be sure to get rid before the warranty runs out

Submitted by M. T. Offiler on Mon, 2013-11-25 18:40.

Why would you are going to pay a premium for limited standard equipment? All I can think of is that you are tempted by the claimed 88.3 mpg. It is therefore a pity that the reviewer did not attempt to explain why he only achieved 57.6 mpg which, although pretty poor seems to be more than he was expecting. What did he expect and why did he think it would be so much worse than the claimed figure? I would not have thought that the power used by a sat nav would put it in the "energy sapping" category.